[OT] [PD] licensing

[pix]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:38:50 +0100
Krzysztof Czaja <czaja at chopin.edu.pl> wrote:

> hi pix,
> 
> and thanks, you are right (I hope), but where is the dividing line?
> What is really the meaning of a derived work (in a moral sense, not
> legally)?

this is where you can probably get into lots of silly religious issues
regarding the various open source licenses... the case doesn't even need
to be as extreme as the situation where some redmond-based software
company reinterprets some open source code into a proprietary product, but
even when someone creates a product under the GPL, that is derived from
some code that was originally under some other open source license... some
people would think even this to be a moral outrage.

as for being right... it safest to assume that i am not, but i'll keep
typing anyway :)

> In my generator/ftable case, it is quite likely, that they are all
> based on some prior art, so I think I will simply use Pd license...
> 
> Krzysztof-who-pretends-to-be-a-decent-monkey-anyway
> 
> pix wrote:
> ...
> > one thing i always found strange about these licences is that they
> > really only cover the monkey-work of software engineering. i'm not
> > sure if there is anything stopping a company from getting another
> > monkey to'reinterpret' some open source code and close the resulting
> > project.